[CentOS] compare zfs xfs and jfs o

Sun Aug 5 03:05:23 UTC 2012
Keith Keller <kkeller at wombat.san-francisco.ca.us>

On 2012-08-04, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote:
> As Nux! initially said, ext4 is the OS that RHEL and Fedora support as
> their main file system.  I would (and do) use that.  The 6.3 kernel does
> support xfs and CentOS has the jfs tools in our extras directory, but I
> like tried and true over experimental.

Isn't XFS on linux tried and true by now?  It's always worked great for

Does ext4 resolve the issue of slow fsck?  Recently I had a ~500GB ext3
filesystem that hadn't been checked in a while; it took over 20 minutes
to fsck.  Meanwhile, a few months ago I had a problematic ~10TB XFS
filesystem, and it took about 1-2 hours to fsck (IIRC 1.5 hrs).  This
was also a reason I switched away from reiserfs (this was well before
Hans Reiser's personal problems)--a reiserfsck of a relatively modest
filesystem took much longer than even an ext3 fsck.

If I get some time I will try it on some spare filesystems, but I'm
curious what other people's experiences are.

I've looked into ZFS on linux, but it still seems not quite ready for
real production use.  I'd love to test it on a less crucial server when
I get the chance.  Their FAQ claims RHEL 6.0 support:



kkeller at wombat.san-francisco.ca.us